Question:
I’m not sure it was an intelligence failure. I believe the bush-backers had plans for a pipeline and they just needed a catalyst. We should have more politicians like Cynthia McKinney.
Whenver intelligence like that which has recently been revealed is obtained, CIA bureaucrats have to decide whether to reveal it to the public and possibly alert the intelligence sources that they have been spied on or keep it secret and prevent the public from doing what they need to do to protect themselves. On the one hand it’s hard to believe that political considerations were left out of the process, and then on the other hand it could be that revealing the intelligence would have alerted the sources they were being spied on. The only two things we know for sure are that Clinton and Bush are so bad that they’ve created a situation in which the idea that they withheld intelligence from the public that they knew had a high probability of saving thousands of lives seems plausible and that the timing of the leaks and the reaction to it are politically motivated. Now , let’s have a long called for investigation. I especially want to know why after the second plane hit the WTC, no Air Force jets were up and doing their job in D.C.????
Two days after the attack I saw in the Washington Times that once the FAA forced all airplanes other than Airforce 1 to prepare to land, there were orders to shoot down any plane whose pilot refused to cooperate. It really was a human shield situation. It only takes 10 minutes to get those fast flyers up . Seems to fit into the do nothing approach. Makes you think they wanted it all to go down, to captitalize on . Like Pearl Harbor. —
Maybe, but deploying the military in rsponse to what at the time seemed like it might have been a civilian rather than a military attack is illegal. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – "An eye for an eye, leaves the world Blind." Gandhi )0 1( JoyInStruggle (REPLY): I just read an article this morning which, surprisingly, makes a convincing argument that the war against Afghanistan is not motivated by a desire for Caspian Sea oil, that the war, rather, is part of the continuing effort to crush the remnants of the Soviet Union. See: THE EMPIRE ISN’T IN AFGHANISTAN FOR THE OIL! By Jared Israel, at http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/oil-1.htm Thus the war against Afghanistan and the war against Yugoslavia were both driven by the same geopolitical strategy. Notice too that the "Axis of Evil" bears no relationship to 911,
Saddam Hussein’s regime financed Al Qaeda, and Al Qaeda is the organization directly resonsible for 9/11. So far as I know you’re right about Iran and North Korea though. but four of the countries on the list
The list has only 3. Are you sure you’re not thinking of the list of terrorism sponsoring states, rather than the Axis of Evil list? The terrorism sponsors are evil, but they’re not all in the Axis of Evil. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -border the old Soviet sphere: The New World Empire is using 911 as a pretext for taking over the Soviet sphere. )1
Response:
I’m not sure it was an intelligence failure. I believe the bush-backers had plans for a pipeline and they just needed a catalyst. We should have more politicians like Cynthia McKinney. )0 Whenver intelligence like that which has recently been revealed is obtained, CIA bureaucrats have to decide whether to reveal it to the public and possibly alert the intelligence sources that they have been spied on or keep it secret and prevent the public from doing what they need to do to protect themselves. On the one hand it’s hard to believe that political considerations were left out of the process, and then on the other hand it could be that revealing the intelligence would have alerted the sources they were being spied on. The only two things we know for sure are that Clinton and Bush are so bad that they’ve created a situation in which the idea that they withheld intelligence from the public that they knew had a high probability of saving thousands of lives seems plausible and that the timing of the leaks and the reaction to it are politically motivated. )2 3( JoyInStruggle (REPLY): Actually, we know TONS more than that. See the web-sites I’ve listed earlier. There’s no reason why Americans have to wait for the government to do everything for us. We’re not infants. We can investigate these things on our own, which is just what lots of people have been doing, since September 11, 2001: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/ http://emperors-clothes.com/ http://www.copvcia.com/ http://www.rense.com/ http://www.infowars.com/ http://www.americanfreepress.net/ For an overview of these problems with the official story, see: http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/ZWI201A.html http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/ZWI202A.html http://www.warontyranny.com/conspiracy/ http://www.copvcia.com/stories/nov_2001/lucy.html http://victoria.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=2421&group=webcast http://www.americanfreepress.net/01_21_02/German_Spy_Says_U_S__Wrong/… http://www.rense.com/general17/eurointelexperts.htm http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&selm=a5bre5%24o8k%242%40nnrp.at… )3 Now , let’s have a long called for investigation. I especially want to know why after the second plane hit the WTC, no Air Force jets were up and doing their job in D.C.???? )0 Two days after the attack I saw in the Washington Times that once the FAA forced all airplanes other than Airforce 1 to prepare to land, there were orders to shoot down any plane whose pilot refused to cooperate. It really was a human shield situation. )2 3( JoyInStruggle (REPLY): We’re not talking "shoot down". We’re talking INTERCEPT — which means escort and signal and force to land. It is standard procedure to intercept planes when they become disabled or stray off-course. This standard procedure was not followed on September 11. The hijacked planes were allowed to fly for over an hour, all the way to Ohio and back. WHY??? )3 (to be continued)
Response:
It was asked: Who is the better American?
Zell Miller, obviously. That the Left refers to him frequently as "Zellout" clinches this fact. Dave Simpson
Response:
SO true – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m not sure it was an intelligence failure. I believe the bush-backers had plans for a pipeline and they just needed a catalyst. We should have more politicians like Cynthia McKinney. Whenver intelligence like that which has recently been revealed is obtained, CIA bureaucrats have to decide whether to reveal it to the public and possibly alert the intelligence sources that they have been spied on or keep it secret and prevent the public from doing what they need to do to protect themselves. On the one hand it’s hard to believe that political considerations were left out of the process, and then on the other hand it could be that revealing the intelligence would have alerted the sources they were being spied on. The only two things we know for sure are that Clinton and Bush are so bad that they’ve created a situation in which the idea that they withheld intelligence from the public that they knew had a high probability of saving thousands of lives seems plausible and that the timing of the leaks and the reaction to it are politically motivated. Now , let’s have a long called for investigation. I especially want to know why after the second plane hit the WTC, no Air Force jets were up and doing their job in D.C.???? Two days after the attack I saw in the Washington Times that once the FAA forced all airplanes other than Airforce 1 to prepare to land, there were orders to shoot down any plane whose pilot refused to cooperate. It really was a human shield situation. It only takes 10 minutes to get those fast flyers up . Seems to fit into the do nothing approach. Makes you think they wanted it all to go down, to captitalize on . Like Pearl Harbor. — Maybe, but deploying the military in rsponse to what at the time seemed like it might have been a civilian rather than a military attack is illegal. "An eye for an eye, leaves the world Blind." Gandhi )0 1( JoyInStruggle (REPLY): I just read an article this morning which, surprisingly, makes a convincing argument that the war against Afghanistan is not motivated by a desire for Caspian Sea oil, that the war, rather, is part of the continuing effort to crush the remnants of the Soviet Union. See: THE EMPIRE ISN’T IN AFGHANISTAN FOR THE OIL! By Jared Israel, at http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/oil-1.htm Thus the war against Afghanistan and the war against Yugoslavia were both driven by the same geopolitical strategy. Notice too that the "Axis of Evil" bears no relationship to 911, Saddam Hussein’s regime financed Al Qaeda, and Al Qaeda is the organization directly resonsible for 9/11. So far as I know you’re right about Iran and North Korea though. but four of the countries on the list The list has only 3. Are you sure you’re not thinking of the list of terrorism sponsoring states, rather than the Axis of Evil list? The terrorism sponsors are evil, but they’re not all in the Axis of Evil. border the old Soviet sphere: The New World Empire is using 911 as a pretext for taking over the Soviet sphere. )1
Response:
(continued, part 2) It only takes 10 minutes to get those fast flyers up . Seems to fit into the do nothing approach. Makes you think they wanted it all to go down, to captitalize on . Like Pearl Harbor. — )0 Maybe, but deploying the military in rsponse to what at the time seemed like it might have been a civilian rather than a military attack is illegal. )2 3( JoyInStruggle (REPLY): No "maybe" about it. This is one of the things Americans have been researching. See: http://emperors-clothes.com/indict/indict-1.htm http://emperors-clothes.com/indict/indict-2.htm http://emperors-clothes.com/indict/indict-3.htm The Air Force is required to respond with an escort IMMEDIATELY. What is the Air Force FOR, if not to protect U.S. air space?! Think about it! A disabled plane is a grave hazard, both to the passengers and to the people on the ground. You don’t just let such a plane fly around till it crashes somewhere! It could hit a nuclear power plant! It could be carrying a nuclear bomb! Do you really think the Air Force is just going to sit back and watch for over an hour to see what happens?! Think!! Yet, on September 11, that is exactly what happened: standard intercept procedures were ignored, and the planes were allowed to fly to their destinations UNIMPEDED!! Can’t you see that something is terribly wrong there? )3 (to be continued)
Response:
(continued, part 3) "An eye for an eye, leaves the world Blind." Gandhi )0 1( JoyInStruggle (REPLY): I just read an article this morning which, surprisingly, makes a convincing argument that the war against Afghanistan is not motivated by a desire for Caspian Sea oil, that the war, rather, is part of the continuing effort to crush the remnants of the Soviet Union. See: THE EMPIRE ISN’T IN AFGHANISTAN FOR THE OIL! By Jared Israel, at http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/oil-1.htm Thus the war against Afghanistan and the war against Yugoslavia were both driven by the same geopolitical strategy. Notice too that the "Axis of Evil" bears no relationship to 911, )1 Saddam Hussein’s regime financed Al Qaeda, and Al Qaeda is the organization directly resonsible for 9/11. So far as I know you’re right about Iran and North Korea though. )2 3( JoyInStruggle (REPLY): I believe that is not accurate. Iraq is one of the few countries where Al Qaeda is NOT welcome. Saddam Hussein’s Ba’ath Party is secular. Al Qaeda is Islamist. Iraq fought an eight-year-long war against the Islamists in Iran, in the 1980s, and lost 400,000 men. These are two of the reasons why Iraq has little affection for the Islamic radicals and fundamentalists. Iraq also has a small Christian population. Israel has repeatedly targeted secularists, and has at times actually supported the Islamists. See the thread titled "Israel’s Hamas" at: This may be one reason why Israel wants the U.S. to attack Iraq instead of Iran. )3 but four of the countries on the list )1 The list has only 3. Are you sure you’re not thinking of the list of terrorism sponsoring states, rather than the Axis of Evil list? The terrorism sponsors are evil, but they’re not all in the Axis of Evil. )2 3( JoyInStruggle (REPLY): Bush enlarged the list last week. He added Cuba, Libya, and Syria. See the article titled "The Axis of Nonsense", at: or http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,715682,00.html )3 border the old Soviet sphere: The New World Empire is using 911 as a pretext for taking over the Soviet sphere. )1
Response:
I’m not sure it was an intelligence failure. I believe the bush-backers had plans for a pipeline and they just needed a catalyst. We should have more politicians like Cynthia McKinney. Now , let’s have a long called for investigation. I especially want to know why after the second plane hit the WTC, no Air Force jets were up and doing their job in D.C.???? It only takes 10 minutes to get those fast flyers up . Seems to fit into the do nothing approach. Makes you think they wanted it all to go down, to captitalize on . Like Pearl Harbor. — "An eye for an eye, leaves the world Blind." Gandhi )0 1( JoyInStruggle (REPLY): I just read an article this morning which, surprisingly, makes a convincing argument that the war against Afghanistan is not motivated by a desire for Caspian Sea oil, that the war, rather, is part of the continuing effort to crush the remnants of the Soviet Union. See: THE EMPIRE ISN’T IN AFGHANISTAN FOR THE OIL! By Jared Israel, at http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/oil-1.htm Thus the war against Afghanistan and the war against Yugoslavia were both driven by the same geopolitical strategy. Notice too that the "Axis of Evil" bears no relationship to 911, but four of the countries on the list border the old Soviet sphere: The New World Empire is using 911 as a pretext for taking over the Soviet sphere. )1
Response:
Just so there’s no mistake, JoyInStruggle and I aren’t suggesting that we’re certain that Bush could have stopped the attacks by reasonable means. For all we know it could be that the whole thing’s just a smear campaign carried out by Democrats eager to score a few cheap political points. We’re just making sure that more people know what there is to know about this. )1 2( JoyInStruggle (REPLY): Allow me to disagree somewhat here. My position is that the official 911 conspiracy theory is full of holes. The numerous contradictions and deficiencies in the official explanation have been exposed and researched by brave people at a number of web-sites, especially: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/ http://emperors-clothes.com/ http://www.copvcia.com/ http://www.rense.com/ http://www.infowars.com/ http://www.americanfreepress.net/ For an overview of these problems with the official story, see: http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/ZWI201A.html http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/ZWI202A.html http://www.warontyranny.com/conspiracy/ http://www.copvcia.com/stories/nov_2001/lucy.html http://victoria.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=2421&group=webcast http://www.americanfreepress.net/01_21_02/German_Spy_Says_U_S__Wrong/… http://www.rense.com/general17/eurointelexperts.htm http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&selm=a5bre5%24o8k%242%40nnrp.at… I really don’t know who perpetrated 911. Last night, I posted articles which show that a number of the alleged hijackers are still alive and talking. Another article reveals that the FBI, incredible as it seems, has failed to find evidence linking 911 to Al Qaeda and the hijackers. The reason it has failed, I’m convinced, is that it has been set on a wild goose chase. I don’t know what sort of capabilities Al Qaeda has, but they certainly did NOT have the ability to make NORAD and the U.S. Air Force stand down and disregard normal intercept procedures on September 11. The lack of interceptors, among many other details, demonstrates, unavoidably, that 911 was, to some extent at least, an "inside job". We’re no more likely to get the truth from the Establishment — from either "party" — than we got the truth about the JFK assassination or the Waco massacre. The most we will get is a huge bipartisan cover-up, Democans and Republicrats covering for each other. I have come to view the government as a front for a larger criminal enterprise. For the most part, this global UNAmerican enterprise stays in the background, but on September 11, it was right out in the open. )2 (to be continued)
Response:
(continued, part 4) McKinney vowed to continue to express her opinions and reissued a call for a congressional probe. "Today’s revelations that the administration, and President Bush, were given months of notice that a terrorist attack was a distinct possibility points out the critical need for a full and complete congressional investigation." She accused the Bush administration of engaging in "a conspiracy of silence" by opposing congressional hearings. )0 That’s good use of language. In situations like this, it’s good to use the word "conspiracy" before Bush’s defenders do. )1 2( JoyInStruggle (REPLY): LOL! Very true! Of course, if ordinary people like us say the two parties collude, that’s a "conspiracy theory"! That’s UNbelievable! That’s proof that we’re lunatics! — if we lived in the old Soviet Union, we would be classified as "political schizophrenics" and treated with mind-killing drugs. But if the politicians tell us that a hermit on the other side of the world conspired and managed to get 19 operatives into our country, who then worked for four years undetected, then hijacked four planes which flew unimpeded for over an hour, and so forth, well, that’s Believable with a capital-B. It’s Believable because it’s what the Establishment SAYS we’re supposed to Believe and Think and Not Question. That’s NOT a conspiracy! A British media magnate — his name, I believe, started with a "B" — once said that SILENCE is the most important tool or weapon the press has. It’s not often that the media have to actually lie to us. It is enough to simply silence all of the key questions. Imagine a man breaks into my house and starts attacking my wife. I grab a knife and stab the intruder. Now the local tv station comes along, but in its report, fails to mention the fact that the intruder WAS an intruder. Instead, the cameras zoom in on the knife and play on the blood. A prim anchor woman then speaks about my "hate" and tries to psychologize me. The viewer would come away with the impression that I am the villain! This is how our media cover Israel and Palestine — with loving attention on one side, and silence on the other. Silence is deadly. Silence KILLS. )2 "If committed and patriotic people had not been pushing for disclosure, today’s revelations would have been hidden by the White House," she said. "Ever since I came to Congress in 1992, there are those who have been trying to silence my voice. I’ve been told to "sit down and shut up" over and over again. Well, I won’t sit down and I won’t shut up until the full and unvarnished truth is placed before the American people." Friends, foes stand firm The furor over McKinney’s comments came soon after her March 25 appearance on the "Flashpoints" public affairs program on KPFA, a public radio station in Berkeley, Calif. "Now is the time for our elected officials to be held accountable," McKinney said on the show. "Now is the time for the media to be held accountable. Why aren’t the hard questions being asked? We know there were numerous warnings of the event to come on Sept. 11. Vladimir Putin, president of Russia, delivered one such warning. Those engaged in unusual stock trades immediately before Sept. 11 knew enough to make millions of dollars from United and American Airlines, certain insurance and brokerage firm stock. What did this administration know and when did it know it about the events of Sept. 11? Who else knew, and why did they not warn the innocent people of New York )0 And Arlington. And the cities from which people working at the Pentagon and World Trade Center commuted. )1 who were needlessly murdered?" McKinney also detailed how some associates of the White House stood to gain from the response to the attacks. "Persons close to this administration are poised to make huge profits off America’s new war," McKinney said. "Former President Bush sits on the board of the Carlyle Group. The Los Angeles Times reports that on a single day last month, Carlyle earned $237 billion selling shares in United Defense Industries, the Army’s fifth-largest contractor. The stock offering was well-timed. Carlyle officials say they decided to take the company public only after the Sept. 11 attacks. The stock sales cashed in on increased congressional support and hefty defense spending." At the time of her radio comments, a Carlyle Group spokesman dismissed McKinney’s remarks as fiction. McKinney’s critics demanded to know why she would question the president, and dismissed her comments as unpatriotic. Her supporters said they appreciate that McKinney is not afraid to give her side of the story. The recent criticisms were among the loudest she has attracted since coming to Congress in 1992. )0 She deserves all the criticism she’s gotten and more, but she doesn’t deserve to have any of this criticism be about *this*. Keep in mind that she voted in favor of the post-9/11 resolution granting Bush absolute power. (This resolution, which every member of both houses other than Barbara Walters voted for, has never been used and will never be used, because any use of it would inevitably be struck down as Unconstitutional.) )1 One of her colleagues, Sen. Zell Miller (D-Ga.), called her remarks "dangerous, loony and irresponsible." )0 Zell Miller’s certainly dangerous, loony and irresponsible. )1 2( JoyInStruggle (REPLY): Yes, it’s amazing how often politicians are actually talking about themselves when they pretend to be talking about others! )2 On Thursday, McKinney’s supporters remembered those harsh words. Some of them, members of a civil rights organization, went to Miller’s office in Atlanta to demand an apology. "When Cynthia came out and said what she did, Zell Miller leveled some very harsh, belligerent and somewhat unreasonable comments about Cynthia McKinney," said the Rev. Markel Hutchins, president of the National Youth Connection, a nonprofit group based in Atlanta. "Now, I think it is important for the gentleman from Georgia to do the gentlemanly thing and apologize to the lady from Georgia," Hutchins said. Miller did not follow their advice. "I have no intention of apologizing to Representative Cynthia McKinney for my reaction last month to her comments about the Bush administration," Miller said. "McKinney charged that the Bush administration deliberately covered up advance knowledge of the attacks in order to profit from them. It was a loony statement last month, and it is still a loony statement today." The congresswoman acknowledged Miller’s remarks. "Zell Miller was elected by the people of the state of Georgia, and of course it’s a free country and he can say whatever he wants to say." Rep. Charlie Norwood (R-Ga.), who had asked House members to alienate McKinney, also was unapologetic. When asked if Norwood intended to say he was sorry, Norwood spokesman John Stone replied, "Of course not." Stone added, "She’s going to say what she has to say and from now to the end of time, it’ll be outlandish." But Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), who opted not to comment immediately after the radio show revelations, heralded McKinney for speaking her mind despite the threat of criticism and ridicule. Like McKinney, he said the episode revealed the need for a congressional probe into how much the administration knew. "I think she had some information that she was able to retain from some source and, I hate to put it in this vein, but she may have the last laugh," Lewis said. "I’ll tell you one thing — this is a very, very serious matter," Lewis said. "If the White House knew, there’s a question of why they didn’t share this information with the American people. They’ve known all these many months and they’ve disclosed everything else, building a case for going into Afghanistan and tracking down the terrorists, but they never released this information until now." Who should conduct probe? McKinney’s comments also drew attention to another issue evolving on Capitol Hill — whether Congress or an independent group should probe what the administration knew and when. Sen. Max Cleland (D-Ga.) and Miller are co-sponsors of Senate legislation to set up an independent commission. Cleland said he does not believe the administration had prior knowledge. While the FBI and CIA had some information, Cleland said, there was no system in place to encourage the agencies to share information. An outside panel would allow a detailed accounting of what happened because Capitol Hill is too close to examine the issue objectively, he said. Lewis, however, said the question should remain with House and Senate members. "I think it’s the obligation of the Congress to conduct the hearings on a matter of this nature," he said. "We provide the FBI, the CIA and other intelligence agencies with millions and billions of dollars." )+ )0
Response:
(continued, part 2) Read the following article, then contrast Cynthia McKinney with Zell Miller. One fights to get at the truth, and one ridicules those who deviate from the party-line. Who is the better American? What future do we choose for America? — a free country, or a global totalitarian party-line empire? What does it profit us, if we gain the world, but lose our freedom? http://www.accessatlanta.com/ajc/news/0502/17mckinney.html +( McKinney said she won’t shut up on Sept. 11, claims she was wrongly derided By MELANIE EVERSLEY Atlanta Journal-Constitution Staff Writer Washington — Cynthia McKinney appeared to feel vindicated Thursday, after revelations that the Bush administration had warnings before Sept. 11 about possible airplane hijackings. A few weeks ago, the Democratic congresswoman from DeKalb County drew widespread criticism for suggesting on a radio show that the administration had prior knowledge of the attack. )+ )0 It’s pretty clear that the administration had prior knowledge. What’s not clear is how certain they were, why they didn’t let us know, and what effect politics has on the timing of these revelations. It seems like the administration waited until after the furor had died down to leak the info, but is being selective about what information it leaks. This is starting to look more and more like Bush’s answering all questions about past drug use except for those involving cocaine. )1 On Thursday, McKinney explained what it was like to be ridiculed. "I was derided by the White House, right-wing talk radio, )0 That’s politics for you. )1 and spokespersons for the military-industrial complex as a conspiracy theorist," McKinney said in a one-page statement. )0 A lot of conspiracy theories have proven to be true. Diary entries from Roosevelt Administration officials reveal that they believed that the threats of the Pearl Harbor attack were probably genuine even before Dec. 7, the Lusitania was carrying literally tons of munitions, and Clinton Administration officials admitted that Echelon and the FBI’s Carnivore plans were real. )1 (to be continued)
Response:
(continued, part 3) "Even my patriotism was questioned because I dared to suggest that Congress should conduct a full and complete investigation into the most disastrous intelligence failure in American history." )0 Another reason her patriotism was questioned was because statists equate love of country with love of the government that rules it. )1 2( JoyInStruggle (REPLY): Statists! — yes, I can wholeheartedly agree with you there! America started out with authority being passed down from God to the citizen, and from the citizen to the government – the government was on the BOTTOM! America was great because the government was LIMITED and accountable and under control! A hundred years later, we decided that being big and united was more important than being free. We were thinking less like individuals and more like a herd, using massive force to suppress rebellion and dissent and difference. The victorious Union grew into a global Empire. Our politicians now think they can govern the world — they think they know what is best for Iraq and Venezuela and Yugoslavia — but they can’t even govern their own capital city properly. We the people have been seduced by PARTIES. Forgetting our interests as individuals, we identify with this or that globalist party. Politics stops being a game for individuals, and becomes again a team sport, with only two teams to choose from. Our partisan identifications lead us to identify with the politicians who lead these parties, and from there, to identify with the government, with Big Brother, with Leviathin. Thus, today, I hear people saying America is great because it has a great GOVERNMENT. Whereas two hundred years ago, people were saying that America is great because is has great PEOPLE and LIMITED government. I’m not religious, but I can see a need for religion: When people stop believing in religion, the Almighty State fills the void and becomes a god. What god gives, god can take away: Thus the State gains the power to take away "god-given" rights. Inevitably, then, we end up with totalitarianism. First, our rights become expendable, sacrificed to the "greater good" of the State, and then even our lives become expendable — as the people at Waco, Texas found out, much to their surprise. )2 (to be continued)
Response:
Just so there’s no mistake, JoyInStruggle and I aren’t suggesting that we’re certain that Bush could have stopped the attacks by reasonable means. For all we know it could be that the whole thing’s just a smear campaign carried out by Democrats eager to score a few cheap political points. We’re just making sure that more people know what there is to know about this. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – 0( JoyInStruggle (REPLY): Read the following article, then contrast Cynthia McKinney with Zell Miller. One fights to get at the truth, and one ridicules those who deviate from the party-line. Who is the better American? What future do we choose for America? — a free country, or a global totalitarian party-line empire? What does it profit us, if we gain the world, but lose our freedom? )0 http://www.accessatlanta.com/ajc/news/0502/17mckinney.html +( McKinney said she won’t shut up on Sept. 11, claims she was wrongly derided By MELANIE EVERSLEY Atlanta Journal-Constitution Staff Writer Washington — Cynthia McKinney appeared to feel vindicated Thursday, after revelations that the Bush administration had warnings before Sept. 11 about possible airplane hijackings. A few weeks ago, the Democratic congresswoman from DeKalb County drew widespread criticism for suggesting on a radio show that the administration had prior knowledge of the attack.
It’s pretty clear that the administration had prior knowledge. What’s not clear is how certain they were, why they didn’t let us know, and what effect politics has on the timing of these revelations. It seems like the administration waited until after the furor had died down to leak the info, but is being selective about what information it leaks. This is starting to look more and more like Bush’s answering all questions about past drug use except for those involving cocaine. On Thursday, McKinney explained what it was like to be ridiculed. "I was derided by the White House, right-wing talk radio,
That’s politics for you. and spokespersons for the military-industrial complex as a conspiracy theorist," McKinney said in a one-page statement.
A lot of conspiracy theories have proven to be true. Diary entries from Roosevelt Administration officials reveal that they believed that the threats of the Pearl Harbor attack were probably genuine even before Dec. 7, the Lusitania was carrying literally tons of munitions, and Clinton Administration officials admitted that Echelon and the FBI’s Carnivore plans were real. "Even my patriotism was questioned because I dared to suggest that Congress should conduct a full and complete investigation into the most disastrous intelligence failure in American history."
Another reason her patriotism was questioned was because statists equate love of country with love of the government that rules it. McKinney vowed to continue to express her opinions and reissued a call for a congressional probe. "Today’s revelations that the administration, and President Bush, were given months of notice that a terrorist attack was a distinct possibility points out the critical need for a full and complete congressional investigation." She accused the Bush administration of engaging in "a conspiracy of silence" by opposing congressional hearings.
That’s good use of language. In situations like this, it’s good to use the word "conspiracy" before Bush’s defenders do. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – "If committed and patriotic people had not been pushing for disclosure, today’s revelations would have been hidden by the White House," she said. "Ever since I came to Congress in 1992, there are those who have been trying to silence my voice. I’ve been told to "sit down and shut up" over and over again. Well, I won’t sit down and I won’t shut up until the full and unvarnished truth is placed before the American people." Friends, foes stand firm The furor over McKinney’s comments came soon after her March 25 appearance on the "Flashpoints" public affairs program on KPFA, a public radio station in Berkeley, Calif. "Now is the time for our elected officials to be held accountable," McKinney said on the show. "Now is the time for the media to be held accountable. Why aren’t the hard questions being asked? We know there were numerous warnings of the event to come on Sept. 11. Vladimir Putin, president of Russia, delivered one such warning. Those engaged in unusual stock trades immediately before Sept. 11 knew enough to make millions of dollars from United and American Airlines, certain insurance and brokerage firm stock. What did this administration know and when did it know it about the events of Sept. 11? Who else knew, and why did they not warn the innocent people of New York
And Arlington. And the cities from which people working at the Pentagon and World Trade Center commuted. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -who were needlessly murdered?" McKinney also detailed how some associates of the White House stood to gain from the response to the attacks. "Persons close to this administration are poised to make huge profits off America’s new war," McKinney said. "Former President Bush sits on the board of the Carlyle Group. The Los Angeles Times reports that on a single day last month, Carlyle earned $237 billion selling shares in United Defense Industries, the Army’s fifth-largest contractor. The stock offering was well-timed. Carlyle officials say they decided to take the company public only after the Sept. 11 attacks. The stock sales cashed in on increased congressional support and hefty defense spending." At the time of her radio comments, a Carlyle Group spokesman dismissed McKinney’s remarks as fiction. McKinney’s critics demanded to know why she would question the president, and dismissed her comments as unpatriotic. Her supporters said they appreciate that McKinney is not afraid to give her side of the story. The recent criticisms were among the loudest she has attracted since coming to Congress in 1992.
She deserves all the criticism she’s gotten and more, but she doesn’t deserve to have any of this criticism be about *this*. Keep in mind that she voted in favor of the post-9/11 resolution granting Bush absolute power. (This resolution, which every member of both houses other than Barbara Walters voted for, has never been used and will never be used, because any use of it would inevitably be struck down as Unconstitutional.) One of her colleagues, Sen. Zell Miller (D-Ga.), called her remarks "dangerous, loony and irresponsible."
Zell Miller’s certainly dangerous, loony and irresponsible. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – On Thursday, McKinney’s supporters remembered those harsh words. Some of them, members of a civil rights organization, went to Miller’s office in Atlanta to demand an apology. "When Cynthia came out and said what she did, Zell Miller leveled some very harsh, belligerent and somewhat unreasonable comments about Cynthia McKinney," said the Rev. Markel Hutchins, president of the National Youth Connection, a nonprofit group based in Atlanta. "Now, I think it is important for the gentleman from Georgia to do the gentlemanly thing and apologize to the lady from Georgia," Hutchins said. Miller did not follow their advice. "I have no intention of apologizing to Representative Cynthia McKinney for my reaction last month to her comments about the Bush administration," Miller said. "McKinney charged that the Bush administration deliberately covered up advance knowledge of the attacks in order to profit from them. It was a loony statement last month, and it is still a loony statement today." The congresswoman acknowledged Miller’s remarks. "Zell Miller was elected by the people of the state of Georgia, and of course it’s a free country and he can say whatever he wants to say." Rep. Charlie Norwood (R-Ga.), who had asked House members to alienate McKinney, also was unapologetic. When asked if Norwood intended to say he was sorry, Norwood spokesman John Stone replied, "Of course not." Stone added, "She’s going to say what she has to say and from now to the end of time, it’ll be outlandish." But Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), who opted not to comment immediately after the radio show revelations, heralded McKinney for speaking her mind despite the threat of criticism and ridicule. Like McKinney, he said the episode revealed the need for a congressional probe into how much the administration knew. "I think she had some information that she was able to retain from some source and, I hate to put it in this vein, but she may have the last laugh," Lewis said. "I’ll tell you one thing — this is a very, very serious matter," Lewis said. "If the White House knew, there’s a question of why they didn’t share this information with the American people. They’ve known all these many months and they’ve disclosed everything else, building a case for going into Afghanistan and tracking down the terrorists, but they never released this information until now." Who should conduct probe? McKinney’s comments also drew attention to another issue evolving on Capitol Hill — whether Congress or an independent group should probe what the administration knew and when. Sen. Max Cleland (D-Ga.) and Miller are co-sponsors of Senate legislation to set up an independent commission. Cleland said he does not believe the administration had prior knowledge. While the FBI and CIA had some information, Cleland said, there was no system in place to encourage the agencies to share
… read more »
Response:
Just so there’s no mistake, JoyInStruggle and I aren’t suggesting that we’re certain that Bush could have stopped the attacks by reasonable means. For all we know it could be that the whole thing’s just a smear campaign carried out by Democrats eager to score a few cheap political points. We’re just making sure that more people know what there is to know about this. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – 0( JoyInStruggle (REPLY): Read the following article, then contrast Cynthia McKinney with Zell Miller. One fights to get at the truth, and one ridicules those who deviate from the party-line. Who is the better American? What future do we choose for America? — a free country, or a global totalitarian party-line empire? What does it profit us, if we gain the world, but lose our freedom? )0 http://www.accessatlanta.com/ajc/news/0502/17mckinney.html +( McKinney said she won’t shut up on Sept. 11, claims she was wrongly derided By MELANIE EVERSLEY Atlanta Journal-Constitution Staff Writer Washington — Cynthia McKinney appeared to feel vindicated Thursday, after revelations that the Bush administration had warnings before Sept. 11 about possible airplane hijackings. A few weeks ago, the Democratic congresswoman from DeKalb County drew widespread criticism for suggesting on a radio show that the administration had prior knowledge of the attack.
It’s pretty clear that the administration had prior knowledge. What’s not clear is how certain they were, why they didn’t let us know, and what effect politics has on the timing of these revelations. It seems like the administration waited until after the furor had died down to leak the info, but is being selective about what information it leaks. This is starting to look more and more like Bush’s answering all questions about past drug use except for those involving cocaine. On Thursday, McKinney explained what it was like to be ridiculed. "I was derided by the White House, right-wing talk radio,
That’s politics for you. and spokespersons for the military-industrial complex as a conspiracy theorist," McKinney said in a one-page statement.
A lot of conspiracy theories have proven to be true. Diary entries from Roosevelt Administration officials reveal that they believed that the threats of the Pearl Harbor attack were probably genuine even before Dec. 7, the Lusitania was carrying literally tons of munitions, and Clinton Administration officials admitted that Echelon and the FBI’s Carnivore plans were real. "Even my patriotism was questioned because I dared to suggest that Congress should conduct a full and complete investigation into the most disastrous intelligence failure in American history."
Another reason her patriotism was questioned was because statists equate love of country with love of the government that rules it. McKinney vowed to continue to express her opinions and reissued a call for a congressional probe. "Today’s revelations that the administration, and President Bush, were given months of notice that a terrorist attack was a distinct possibility points out the critical need for a full and complete congressional investigation." She accused the Bush administration of engaging in "a conspiracy of silence" by opposing congressional hearings.
That’s good use of language. In situations like this, it’s good to use the word "conspiracy" before Bush’s defenders do. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – "If committed and patriotic people had not been pushing for disclosure, today’s revelations would have been hidden by the White House," she said. "Ever since I came to Congress in 1992, there are those who have been trying to silence my voice. I’ve been told to "sit down and shut up" over and over again. Well, I won’t sit down and I won’t shut up until the full and unvarnished truth is placed before the American people." Friends, foes stand firm The furor over McKinney’s comments came soon after her March 25 appearance on the "Flashpoints" public affairs program on KPFA, a public radio station in Berkeley, Calif. "Now is the time for our elected officials to be held accountable," McKinney said on the show. "Now is the time for the media to be held accountable. Why aren’t the hard questions being asked? We know there were numerous warnings of the event to come on Sept. 11. Vladimir Putin, president of Russia, delivered one such warning. Those engaged in unusual stock trades immediately before Sept. 11 knew enough to make millions of dollars from United and American Airlines, certain insurance and brokerage firm stock. What did this administration know and when did it know it about the events of Sept. 11? Who else knew, and why did they not warn the innocent people of New York
And Arlington. And the cities from which people working at the Pentagon and World Trade Center commuted. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -who were needlessly murdered?" McKinney also detailed how some associates of the White House stood to gain from the response to the attacks. "Persons close to this administration are poised to make huge profits off America’s new war," McKinney said. "Former President Bush sits on the board of the Carlyle Group. The Los Angeles Times reports that on a single day last month, Carlyle earned $237 billion selling shares in United Defense Industries, the Army’s fifth-largest contractor. The stock offering was well-timed. Carlyle officials say they decided to take the company public only after the Sept. 11 attacks. The stock sales cashed in on increased congressional support and hefty defense spending." At the time of her radio comments, a Carlyle Group spokesman dismissed McKinney’s remarks as fiction. McKinney’s critics demanded to know why she would question the president, and dismissed her comments as unpatriotic. Her supporters said they appreciate that McKinney is not afraid to give her side of the story. The recent criticisms were among the loudest she has attracted since coming to Congress in 1992.
She deserves all the criticism she’s gotten and more, but she doesn’t deserve to have any of this criticism be about *this*. Keep in mind that she voted in favor of the post-9/11 resolution granting Bush absolute power. (This resolution, which every member of both houses other than Barbara Walters voted for, has never been used and will never be used, because any use of it would inevitably be struck down as Unconstitutional.) One of her colleagues, Sen. Zell Miller (D-Ga.), called her remarks "dangerous, loony and irresponsible."
Zell Miller’s certainly dangerous, loony and irresponsible. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – On Thursday, McKinney’s supporters remembered those harsh words. Some of them, members of a civil rights organization, went to Miller’s office in Atlanta to demand an apology. "When Cynthia came out and said what she did, Zell Miller leveled some very harsh, belligerent and somewhat unreasonable comments about Cynthia McKinney," said the Rev. Markel Hutchins, president of the National Youth Connection, a nonprofit group based in Atlanta. "Now, I think it is important for the gentleman from Georgia to do the gentlemanly thing and apologize to the lady from Georgia," Hutchins said. Miller did not follow their advice. "I have no intention of apologizing to Representative Cynthia McKinney for my reaction last month to her comments about the Bush administration," Miller said. "McKinney charged that the Bush administration deliberately covered up advance knowledge of the attacks in order to profit from them. It was a loony statement last month, and it is still a loony statement today." The congresswoman acknowledged Miller’s remarks. "Zell Miller was elected by the people of the state of Georgia, and of course it’s a free country and he can say whatever he wants to say." Rep. Charlie Norwood (R-Ga.), who had asked House members to alienate McKinney, also was unapologetic. When asked if Norwood intended to say he was sorry, Norwood spokesman John Stone replied, "Of course not." Stone added, "She’s going to say what she has to say and from now to the end of time, it’ll be outlandish." But Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), who opted not to comment immediately after the radio show revelations, heralded McKinney for speaking her mind despite the threat of criticism and ridicule. Like McKinney, he said the episode revealed the need for a congressional probe into how much the administration knew. "I think she had some information that she was able to retain from some source and, I hate to put it in this vein, but she may have the last laugh," Lewis said. "I’ll tell you one thing — this is a very, very serious matter," Lewis said. "If the White House knew, there’s a question of why they didn’t share this information with the American people. They’ve known all these many months and they’ve disclosed everything else, building a case for going into Afghanistan and tracking down the terrorists, but they never released this information until now." Who should conduct probe? McKinney’s comments also drew attention to another issue evolving on Capitol Hill — whether Congress or an independent group should probe what the administration knew and when. Sen. Max Cleland (D-Ga.) and Miller are co-sponsors of Senate legislation to set up an independent commission. Cleland said he does not believe the administration had prior knowledge. While the FBI and CIA had some information, Cleland said, there was no system in place to encourage the agencies to share information. An outside panel would allow a detailed accounting of what happened
… read more »
Response:
0( JoyInStruggle (REPLY): Read the following article, then contrast Cynthia McKinney with Zell Miller. One fights to get at the truth, and one ridicules those who deviate from the party-line. Who is the better American? What future do we choose for America? — a free country, or a global totalitarian party-line empire? What does it profit us, if we gain the world, but lose our freedom? )0 http://www.accessatlanta.com/ajc/news/0502/17mckinney.html +( McKinney said she won’t shut up on Sept. 11, claims she was wrongly derided By MELANIE EVERSLEY Atlanta Journal-Constitution Staff Writer Washington — Cynthia McKinney appeared to feel vindicated Thursday, after revelations that the Bush administration had warnings before Sept. 11 about possible airplane hijackings. A few weeks ago, the Democratic congresswoman from DeKalb County drew widespread criticism for suggesting on a radio show that the administration had prior knowledge of the attack. On Thursday, McKinney explained what it was like to be ridiculed. "I was derided by the White House, right-wing talk radio, and spokespersons for the military-industrial complex as a conspiracy theorist," McKinney said in a one-page statement. "Even my patriotism was questioned because I dared to suggest that Congress should conduct a full and complete investigation into the most disastrous intelligence failure in American history." McKinney vowed to continue to express her opinions and reissued a call for a congressional probe. "Today’s revelations that the administration, and President Bush, were given months of notice that a terrorist attack was a distinct possibility points out the critical need for a full and complete congressional investigation." She accused the Bush administration of engaging in "a conspiracy of silence" by opposing congressional hearings. "If committed and patriotic people had not been pushing for disclosure, today’s revelations would have been hidden by the White House," she said. "Ever since I came to Congress in 1992, there are those who have been trying to silence my voice. I’ve been told to "sit down and shut up" over and over again. Well, I won’t sit down and I won’t shut up until the full and unvarnished truth is placed before the American people." Friends, foes stand firm The furor over McKinney’s comments came soon after her March 25 appearance on the "Flashpoints" public affairs program on KPFA, a public radio station in Berkeley, Calif. "Now is the time for our elected officials to be held accountable," McKinney said on the show. "Now is the time for the media to be held accountable. Why aren’t the hard questions being asked? We know there were numerous warnings of the event to come on Sept. 11. Vladimir Putin, president of Russia, delivered one such warning. Those engaged in unusual stock trades immediately before Sept. 11 knew enough to make millions of dollars from United and American Airlines, certain insurance and brokerage firm stock. What did this administration know and when did it know it about the events of Sept. 11? Who else knew, and why did they not warn the innocent people of New York who were needlessly murdered?" McKinney also detailed how some associates of the White House stood to gain from the response to the attacks. "Persons close to this administration are poised to make huge profits off America’s new war," McKinney said. "Former President Bush sits on the board of the Carlyle Group. The Los Angeles Times reports that on a single day last month, Carlyle earned $237 billion selling shares in United Defense Industries, the Army’s fifth-largest contractor. The stock offering was well-timed. Carlyle officials say they decided to take the company public only after the Sept. 11 attacks. The stock sales cashed in on increased congressional support and hefty defense spending." At the time of her radio comments, a Carlyle Group spokesman dismissed McKinney’s remarks as fiction. McKinney’s critics demanded to know why she would question the president, and dismissed her comments as unpatriotic. Her supporters said they appreciate that McKinney is not afraid to give her side of the story. The recent criticisms were among the loudest she has attracted since coming to Congress in 1992. One of her colleagues, Sen. Zell Miller (D-Ga.), called her remarks "dangerous, loony and irresponsible." On Thursday, McKinney’s supporters remembered those harsh words. Some of them, members of a civil rights organization, went to Miller’s office in Atlanta to demand an apology. "When Cynthia came out and said what she did, Zell Miller leveled some very harsh, belligerent and somewhat unreasonable comments about Cynthia McKinney," said the Rev. Markel Hutchins, president of the National Youth Connection, a nonprofit group based in Atlanta. "Now, I think it is important for the gentleman from Georgia to do the gentlemanly thing and apologize to the lady from Georgia," Hutchins said. Miller did not follow their advice. "I have no intention of apologizing to Representative Cynthia McKinney for my reaction last month to her comments about the Bush administration," Miller said. "McKinney charged that the Bush administration deliberately covered up advance knowledge of the attacks in order to profit from them. It was a loony statement last month, and it is still a loony statement today." The congresswoman acknowledged Miller’s remarks. "Zell Miller was elected by the people of the state of Georgia, and of course it’s a free country and he can say whatever he wants to say." Rep. Charlie Norwood (R-Ga.), who had asked House members to alienate McKinney, also was unapologetic. When asked if Norwood intended to say he was sorry, Norwood spokesman John Stone replied, "Of course not." Stone added, "She’s going to say what she has to say and from now to the end of time, it’ll be outlandish." But Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), who opted not to comment immediately after the radio show revelations, heralded McKinney for speaking her mind despite the threat of criticism and ridicule. Like McKinney, he said the episode revealed the need for a congressional probe into how much the administration knew. "I think she had some information that she was able to retain from some source and, I hate to put it in this vein, but she may have the last laugh," Lewis said. "I’ll tell you one thing — this is a very, very serious matter," Lewis said. "If the White House knew, there’s a question of why they didn’t share this information with the American people. They’ve known all these many months and they’ve disclosed everything else, building a case for going into Afghanistan and tracking down the terrorists, but they never released this information until now." Who should conduct probe? McKinney’s comments also drew attention to another issue evolving on Capitol Hill — whether Congress or an independent group should probe what the administration knew and when. Sen. Max Cleland (D-Ga.) and Miller are co-sponsors of Senate legislation to set up an independent commission. Cleland said he does not believe the administration had prior knowledge. While the FBI and CIA had some information, Cleland said, there was no system in place to encourage the agencies to share information. An outside panel would allow a detailed accounting of what happened because Capitol Hill is too close to examine the issue objectively, he said. Lewis, however, said the question should remain with House and Senate members. "I think it’s the obligation of the Congress to conduct the hearings on a matter of this nature," he said. "We provide the FBI, the CIA and other intelligence agencies with millions and billions of dollars." )+
Response:
Question:
Congratulations Nighthawk! WTG Ann C
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Man I need some Alice Cooper blasting right about now! I just finished my last final… EVER! 13 years to get a Bachelor’s… well I met my goal I *did* graduate before my daughters!
Response:
Shit I wasn’t even born yet! LOL AnnC
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – in Alice Cooper? Think I’ve heard of, but again, kinda modern, right? I think i was in jr. high. Sounds about right. Maybe 69? 70?
Response:
KEWL DEAL! Congrats, and when is the party? Rob
Hehe… I wish.. I get the kids at 6:00 (I’m out of school, so I get the kids Fridays at 6 instead of Saturdays at 10:00) Although for all the bitching about how I must not really want the kids since I hadn’t been taking them all the time I was eligible, it’s interesting to see this mother’s day weekend that she doesn’t want to take them….
Response:
Alice Cooper? Think I’ve heard of, but again, kinda modern, right?
I think i was in jr. high.
Response:
Must be around the time of Heart and Peter Frampton then. I like them better. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – You are not familiar with Alice Cooper? He has been around for quite Denise, he was practically DEAD by then! Probably ‘70 or so.
Response:
Alice Cooper? Think I’ve heard of, but again, kinda modern, right? I think i was in jr. high.
Sounds about right. Maybe 69? 70?
Response:
Alice Cooper? Think I’ve heard of, but again, kinda modern, right? I think i was in jr. high. Sounds about right. Maybe 69? 70?
yeah, about that….
Response:
That’s because he won’t let the other groups borrow his big snake 
Daisy – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Nope. Heard of him, and that’s all. I am a little familiar with this Classic Rock: Billy Idol Dire Straits Foreigner Phil Collins Pink Floyd ZZ Top Why isn’t Alice Cooper in this "classic rock" list? Did I miss him or he doesn’t fit into this genre? Clueless in Colorado You are not familiar with Alice Cooper? He has been around for quite a Denise — Cowards die many times before their deaths; The valiant never taste of death but once. -Shakespeare- Is somebody going to clue me in or not? I really don’t know when this group was popular. So make all the fun you want! See if I care! LOL. So what decade are we talkin here? Alice Cooper? Think I’ve heard of, but again, kinda modern, right? Kinda, you possibly heard it while driving your new Vega.
Response:
Hey he’s still going strong!! Still has his snake too 
Daisy
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – You are not familiar with Alice Cooper? He has been around for quite a Denise, he was practically DEAD by then! Probably ‘70 or so.
Response:
Man I need some Alice Cooper blasting right about now! I just finished my last final… EVER! 13 years to get a Bachelor’s… well I met my goal I *did* graduate before my daughters!
Congrats! — They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. – Benjamin Franklin
Response:
Woo Hoo! Awesome news! Get out and boogie your degreed hiney off… Cheryl – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Man I need some Alice Cooper blasting right about now! I just finished my last final… EVER! 13 years to get a Bachelor’s… well I met my goal I *did* graduate before my daughters!
Response:
Alice Cooper? Think I’ve heard of, but again, kinda modern, right? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Man I need some Alice Cooper blasting right about now! I just finished my last final… EVER! 13 years to get a Bachelor’s… well I met my goal I *did* graduate before my daughters!
Response:
KEWL DEAL! Congrats, and when is the party? Rob
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Man I need some Alice Cooper blasting right about now! I just finished my last final… EVER! 13 years to get a Bachelor’s… well I met my goal I *did* graduate before my daughters!
Response:
Denise — Cowards die many times before their deaths; The valiant never taste of death but once. -Shakespeare-
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Man I need some Alice Cooper blasting right about now! I just finished my last final… EVER! 13 years to get a Bachelor’s… well I met my goal I *did* graduate before my daughters!
Response:
Alice Cooper? Think I’ve heard of, but again, kinda modern, right?
Kinda, you possibly heard it while driving your new Vega.
Response:
Is somebody going to clue me in or not? I really don’t know when this group was popular. So make all the fun you want! See if I care! LOL. So what decade are we talkin here? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Alice Cooper? Think I’ve heard of, but again, kinda modern, right? Kinda, you possibly heard it while driving your new Vega.
Response:
You are not familiar with Alice Cooper? He has been around for quite a Denise — Cowards die many times before their deaths; The valiant never taste of death but once. -Shakespeare- – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Is somebody going to clue me in or not? I really don’t know when this group was popular. So make all the fun you want! See if I care! LOL. So what decade are we talkin here? Alice Cooper? Think I’ve heard of, but again, kinda modern, right? Kinda, you possibly heard it while driving your new Vega.
Response:
Nope. Heard of him, and that’s all. I am a little familiar with this Classic Rock: Billy Idol Dire Straits Foreigner Phil Collins Pink Floyd ZZ Top Why isn’t Alice Cooper in this "classic rock" list? Did I miss him or he doesn’t fit into this genre? Clueless in Colorado – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – You are not familiar with Alice Cooper? He has been around for quite a Denise — Cowards die many times before their deaths; The valiant never taste of death but once. -Shakespeare- Is somebody going to clue me in or not? I really don’t know when this group was popular. So make all the fun you want! See if I care! LOL. So what decade are we talkin here? Alice Cooper? Think I’ve heard of, but again, kinda modern, right? Kinda, you possibly heard it while driving your new Vega.
Response:
He is a Shock rocker……you know, blood coming out of dolls, that kind of thing. He isn’t my style but some must have loved him because he made a fortune. Denise — Cowards die many times before their deaths; The valiant never taste of death but once. -Shakespeare- – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Nope. Heard of him, and that’s all. I am a little familiar with this Classic Rock: Billy Idol Dire Straits Foreigner Phil Collins Pink Floyd ZZ Top Why isn’t Alice Cooper in this "classic rock" list? Did I miss him or he doesn’t fit into this genre? Clueless in Colorado You are not familiar with Alice Cooper? He has been around for quite a Denise — Cowards die many times before their deaths; The valiant never taste of death but once. -Shakespeare- Is somebody going to clue me in or not? I really don’t know when this group was popular. So make all the fun you want! See if I care! LOL. So what decade are we talkin here? Alice Cooper? Think I’ve heard of, but again, kinda modern, right? Kinda, you possibly heard it while driving your new Vega.
Response:
Well, there’s no accounting for taste, I guess. Each to his/her own…. Blood coming out of dolls….sounds superb…. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – He is a Shock rocker……you know, blood coming out of dolls, that kind of thing. He isn’t my style but some must have loved him because he made a fortune. Denise — Cowards die many times before their deaths; The valiant never taste of death but once. -Shakespeare- Nope. Heard of him, and that’s all. I am a little familiar with this Classic Rock: Billy Idol Dire Straits Foreigner Phil Collins Pink Floyd ZZ Top Why isn’t Alice Cooper in this "classic rock" list? Did I miss him or he doesn’t fit into this genre? Clueless in Colorado You are not familiar with Alice Cooper? He has been around for Denise — Cowards die many times before their deaths; The valiant never taste of death but once. -Shakespeare- Is somebody going to clue me in or not? I really don’t know when this group was popular. So make all the fun you want! See if I care! LOL. So what decade are we talkin here? Alice Cooper? Think I’ve heard of, but again, kinda modern, right? Kinda, you possibly heard it while driving your new Vega.
Response:
Before those :^) Nope. Heard of him, and that’s all. I am a little familiar with this Classic Rock: Billy Idol Dire Straits Foreigner Phil Collins Pink Floyd ZZ Top Why isn’t Alice Cooper in this "classic rock" list? Did I miss him or he doesn’t fit into this genre?
More like AC/DC, Kiss, etc.
Response:
You are not familiar with Alice Cooper? He has been around for quite a
Denise, he was practically DEAD by then! Probably ‘70 or so.
Response:
From http://www.alicecooper.com/discography.html First Album – Pretties for You (1969) First real hit "I’m eighteen" – 1971 off Love It To Death Every spring since 1972 many of us have enjoyed "School’s Out" off the album of the same name. Nice little commentary: "Debuting in 1969, Alice Cooper didn’t take long to turn the music world upside down by wearing outrageous costumes and make-up, while performing loud, hard rock music framing witty, sharp-edged lyrics. Add to that his colossally horrific stage theatrics and an outrageous, rebellious persona, metal pioneer Alice Cooper (n
Question:
Writing down the value of the airplanes is only that – it doesn’t necessarily mean they’re dumping them. Apparently they are carrying them on their books at values which are higher than they actually are worth. I guess the feeling is that if they are already having a major loss this year, they might as well take the extra hit in the hope that it positions them better in the future.
Doesn’t the New York Stock Exchange de-list a company that has "n" successive losing quarters [years?] ? A strong incentive to lump everything into one bad year.
Response:
BTW, US’s MD80’s are the oldest ones flying – they were acquired with the PSA merger, and PSA was the launch customer for them, so these planes are probably pushing 20 years old.
Pushing from the other side ! The oldest dates from 1980, and most are of 1980-82 vintage except for a couple of follow-ons added in 1986. B.
Response:
BTW, US’s MD80’s are the oldest ones flying – they were acquired with the PSA merger, and PSA was the launch customer for them, so these planes are probably pushing 20 years old.
Yes and no. US’s MD-80s are AMONG the oldest ones flying, as PSA was not the launch customer–Swissair was. But, they were one of the first, and at least a half-dozen of the remaining US MD-80 fleet have already passed their 20th birthday. The four oldest were manufactured in 1980, with 11 more from 1981.
Response:
A news report about US Airways annoucing a big time loss says: "The carrier said Friday it would lose more than $160 million before items and that it expects to record a charge of $405 million to write down its fleet of Fokker 100, Boeing 737-200, and MD-80 aircraft and certain related assets." Now, what kinds of expenses are associated with the letting go of aircraft? What on earth is US going to be left with if it is ridding itself of the above quoted aircraft? Does it already have enough Airbusses to cover for these? I know it also leases out its old 732s to the likes of Canjet (C3)… so is it ridding itself of these(and essentially its leasing division?)?
"Writing down" assets is merely an accounting procedure and does NOT necessarily mean that the above aircraft types are going to be parked tomorrow. While US’s long-term fleet plan does call for all three types to be phased out, they will each be around for at least another couple of years. I would guess that the -200s and the MDs will go before the li’l Fokkers. As far as what specific costs are associated with this accounting procedure, well, hey, I’m no accountant!
Response:
items and that it expects to record a charge of $405 million to write down its fleet of Fokker 100, Boeing 737-200, and MD-80 aircraft and certain related assets." Now, what kinds of expenses are associated with the letting go of aircraft?
Writing off doesn’t mean letting go. It just means that the airline no longer considers these to have any resale value if I understand correctly. But they can continue to use them, just like Air Canada continues to use its old DC-9s. It is more of a tax / profits technique. I suspect that they are doing this to cook their books as a result of the UA-merger thing.
Response:
A news report about US Airways annoucing a big time loss says: "The carrier said Friday it would lose more than $160 million before items and that it expects to record a charge of $405 million to write down its fleet of Fokker 100, Boeing 737-200, and MD-80 aircraft and certain related assets." Now, what kinds of expenses are associated with the letting go of aircraft? What on earth is US going to be left with if it is ridding itself of the above quoted aircraft? Does it already have enough Airbusses to cover for these? I know it also leases out its old 732s to the likes of Canjet (C3)… so is it ridding itself of these(and essentially its leasing division?)? — Amish Vancouver BC
Response:
A news report about US Airways annoucing a big time loss says: "The carrier said Friday it would lose more than $160 million before items and that it expects to record a charge of $405 million to write down its fleet of Fokker 100, Boeing 737-200, and MD-80 aircraft and certain related assets." Now, what kinds of expenses are associated with the letting go of aircraft? What on earth is US going to be left with if it is ridding itself of the above quoted aircraft? Does it already have enough Airbusses to cover for these? I know it also leases out its old 732s to the likes of Canjet (C3)… so is it ridding itself of these(and essentially its leasing division?)?
Part of the balance sheet is assets, included in which are the current values of their aircraft. AC recently invented money when they ‘extended’ the useful life of their A320 fleet, allowing them to spread scheduled depreciation over 25 years instead of 20. US is taking $405M of old airplanes out of their fleet. Matthew
Response:
A news report about US Airways annoucing a big time loss says: "The carrier said Friday it would lose more than $160 million before items and that it expects to record a charge of $405 million to write down its fleet of Fokker 100, Boeing 737-200, and MD-80 aircraft and certain related assets." Now, what kinds of expenses are associated with the letting go of aircraft?
Well, used planes aren’t worth as much as new ones. Or… If you end a lease early, there is a penalty. What on earth is US going to be left with if it is ridding itself of the above quoted aircraft? Does it already have enough Airbusses to cover for these?
Due to the economy, business travel is down. So, less ac are needed.
Response:
Writing down the value of the airplanes is only that – it doesn’t necessarily mean they’re dumping them. Apparently they are carrying them on their books at values which are higher than they actually are worth. I guess the feeling is that if they are already having a major loss this year, they might as well take the extra hit in the hope that it positions them better in the future. BTW, US’s MD80’s are the oldest ones flying – they were acquired with the PSA merger, and PSA was the launch customer for them, so these planes are probably pushing 20 years old. Jeff
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – A news report about US Airways annoucing a big time loss says: "The carrier said Friday it would lose more than $160 million before items and that it expects to record a charge of $405 million to write down its fleet of Fokker 100, Boeing 737-200, and MD-80 aircraft and certain related assets." Now, what kinds of expenses are associated with the letting go of aircraft? What on earth is US going to be left with if it is ridding itself of the above quoted aircraft? Does it already have enough Airbusses to cover for these? I know it also leases out its old 732s to the likes of Canjet (C3)… so is it ridding itself of these(and essentially its leasing division?)? — Amish Vancouver BC
Response:
Question:
For now on any posts that are threatening in any nature towards anyone in this group will be forwarded to the FBI by me.
As a "dork" with personal experience in this subject, it takes more than a simple threat to even get your local police interested, unless you have some clout. (My case is far too identifiable to detail, but a single post to a single Usenet newsgroup ended up with (claims of) six different (and not all of them actually involved) ISPs, three local law enforcement agencies (one of which (the one which had neither jurisdiction nor interest) was, in fact, _not_ contacted – simply lied about), and didn’t even result in a _warning_ to me. (If the admins cared at my ISP, they looked and saw it was justified. More likely, that "report" was a lie as well.) While the interstate (or international) wire transmission of threats may fall under FBI mandate, it is unlikely to even result in an opened file, unless it can be proven to be actually linked to a crime, or conspiracy to commit one. (Recent reading provided an accurate description of most FBI agents: "accountants with badges".) The Secret Service may be more interested, if it involves their own mandate of computer fraud. (The only _manditory_ investigations of threats they pursue are those involving the Executive, Judicial, or Legislative branches in some manner.) Posting threatening content, whether news, email, IRC, or even via the Web, is generally TOS-able offence. (Terms of Service violation – AKA AUP, Acceptable Use Policy) I’m afraid that it is much easier to get someone TOS’d than it is to interest law-enforcement. As for "net-copping", I’ve done it, and will continue to do so where _I_ feel necessary. (I’m a stranger here, and likely will not act upon suicide threats as yet; my judgement is admittedly skewed at this time – I may just be a gutless sonofabitch on this topic.) Mainly for spamming, but on occasion for _malicious_ identity-forging. (Trolling for flames with someone else’s address, for example.) (More on suicide-posts: mayhaps this will explain more how I see them – they appear to fit three major catagories. "Cry for help" is the most obvious, and this is how they will probably be acted upon, it seems. "Release" or "venting" is how I’ve seen some, and in fact some of _mine_ may have been thus. The final (in more ways than one) catagory is, of course, the real thing, _without_ asking for help. And it can be so difficult to discern the subtle (and not-so-subtle) clues that would tell what to do about it… (Perhaps I can _afford_ to be gutless; with only a few days’ reading here so far, I’m finding that, even with my current "dead" state emotionally, I am _empathising_ with far too many people. My own problems seem so petty and selfish in comparison, and that accentuates the downward spiral. (I even had to put the knife up, as cutting was doing nothing but providing something to do as I read, instead of the feeling and control and release I was looking for.) (I don’t know if I will (or _can_) return here. Not because of suicide – I’ve not sunk to the levels of December yet. But rather, because there is nothing inside me to _give_, when all my being says that I _must_…) Charlie — For more information about this service, send e-mail to:
Response:
For now on any posts that are threatening in any nature towards anyone in this group will be forwarded to the FBI by me.
Where the hell are you going to forward them? I’m sorry but this just cracked me up….they don’t have any "Internet Abuse Reporting Agency" that I am aware of. Puh-lease Vali!!!! hehe…but thanks for making me laugh for the first time tonight Nik "I want to believe"……The X-Files ICQ # 7859124
Response:
For now on any posts that are threatening in any nature towards anyone in this group will be forwarded to the FBI by me.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -For now on any posts that are threatening in any nature towards anyone in this group will be forwarded to the FBI by me. Where the hell are you going to forward them? I’m sorry but this just cracked me up….they don’t have any "Internet Abuse Reporting Agency" that I am aware of. Puh-lease Vali!!!! hehe…but thanks for making me laugh for the first time tonight
oh come on nikki, let him call the fbi. they may not care about internet squabbling but if he can give them enough grief they might just lock him up without a mouse. dennis Oh! somewhere in this favored land the sun is shining bright; The band is playing somewhere, and somewhere hearts are light And somewhere men are laughing, and somewhere children shout But there is no joy in Mudville — mighty Casey has Struck Out
Response:
For now on any posts that are threatening in any nature towards anyone in this group will be forwarded to the FBI by me.
you are such a pitiful person….you obviously need more help than you can get here….and you seem to have OCD about the FBI…. listen up yourself DORK….check yourselff into the hospital, I’m sure you’d make an interesting medical experiment. Mark too strong for pitious pinheads like you…
Response:
oh come on nikki, let him call the fbi. they may not care about internet squabbling but if he can give them enough grief they might just lock him up without a mouse. dennis
Sorry, my mistake……just wasn’t thinking for the moment! Nik "I want to believe"……The X-Files ICQ # 7859124
Response:
For now on any posts that are threatening in any nature towards anyone in this group will be forwarded to the FBI by me.
Hey Vali, what’s cook’n?? We haven’t seen you here in a while. Where have you been?? Sincerely Stewart
Response:
For now on any posts that are threatening in any nature towards anyone in this group will be forwarded to the FBI by me.
My Dork is listening…… Krey — God was my co-pilot but we crashed in the mountains /VVVVV AAAAA/
Response:
. Went to a wedding on Sat. Had pesto ravioli for an hors doeuvre. But I also had scallops wrapped in bacon:). Didnt do too badly at dinner – just 2 pieces of Roast Beef(no mashed potaotoes and no bread) but drank A LOT of wine:(. Then yesterday I went to my moms for dinner and had ravioli with marinara sauce, a meatball and a piece of Italian bread. Back on the low carb bandwagon today! Sue